SEBI

Additional Penalty for Repeated Delivery Default by a seller/buyer – SEBI

Additional Penalty for Repeated Delivery Default by a seller/buyer to be imposed @ 3 % of the value of the delivery default

SEBI had stipulated delivery default norms vide Circular SEBI/HO/CDMRD/DRMP/CIR/P/2021/35 dated March 23, 2021.

In order to put in place a suitable deterrent mechanism to address instances of repeated delivery defaults and to further strengthen the delivery mechanism and to ensure market integrity, SEBI has decided to impose additional penalty for repeated delivery default. 

It has been provided that in the case of repeated default by a seller or a buyer, for each instance of repeated default, an additional penalty shall be imposed, which shall be 3 % of the value of the delivery default.

The repeated default has been defined as an event, wherein a default on delivery obligations takes place 3 times or more during a six months period on a rolling basis.

The penalty levied shall be transferred to Settlement Guarantee Fund (SGF) of the Clearing Corporation. This penalty is effective after one month from the date of issuance of SEBI circular.

Read SEBI Circular SEBI/HO/CDMRD/DRMP/CIR/P/2021/619 Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

Prima facie satisfaction u/s 148 can not be a non-existing or incorrect information

The prima facie satisfaction u/s 148 cannot be stretched to a non-existing information or incorrect information - ITAT In a…

18 hours ago
  • SEBI

Mutual Funds to value physical Gold and Silver by using the polled spot prices

Mutual Funds to value physical Gold and Silver by using the polled spot prices published by the recognized stock exchanges…

1 day ago
  • bankruptcy

SC allows simultaneous CIRP proceedings against principal debtor & corporate guarantor

Supreme Court allows simultaneous CIRP proceedings against principal debtor and its corporate guarantor, declines to frame any guidelines In a…

1 day ago
  • Income Tax

Merely because sales were declared for only one month, same cannot be treated as bogus

Merely because assessee had declared sales for only one month, the same cannot be treated as bogus on the basis…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

ITAT deleted addition as method of accounting had been accepted in earlier years

ITAT deleted addition as the method of accounting had been accepted by the department in earlier years and the entire…

3 days ago
  • Benami

Orders passed under Benami Act cannot be challenged under IBC 2016 – SC

Orders passed under Benami Act cannot be challenged under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - SC In a recent judgment,…

4 days ago